업무방해등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal merely stated that the Defendant did not disclose his status and reasons and did not interfere with D’s work, and did not explain the grounds for arrest to F’s police officers who arrested flagrant offenders without explaining the grounds for arrest. However, the Defendant did not wish F to explain the reasons for arrest.
2. According to the judgment of the witness D’s trial statement and related evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the victim D, who is a security personnel of subway 9 line, was under the influence of alcohol in the doer Station. The victim D, who was under the influence of alcohol in the doer Station, was aware of the defendant's residence and went to C Station, the transfer personnel of the defendant 4 line, while performing the same bath as the facts charged, from the time when the defendant got into the C Station 5 line 4 line 4 line 4 line 4 line 4 line 4 line 4 line 4 line 4 line her line her line her line her line her line her line her line her to leave for the purpose of the subway security service, and filed a report with the police station. According to the fact that D's request for assistance with the public interest personnel, at the time of the instant case, the defendant moved to the service room with the defendant, and the defendant did not appear to be her will to be able to be aware of the remainder of the defendant's desire to visit the police officer's duty.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.
3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.